Vintage comments on Points - The Shadow (2001)

[Carolinian Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close Carolinian]

I think it is interesting to go back and read the comments of longtime timeshare columnist The Shadow on RCI Points, written in 2001:

http://www.thetimesharebeat.com/arch...ts/tsmay69.htm

[BocaBum99 Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close BocaBum99]

RCI Points is a terrible points program. Even so, it is a dramatic improvement over RCI weeks. That much the Shadow was clueless about in his article. What he was right about is the scheme that RCI used to get more money to convert the weeks. He is very cynical about that offering. But, he would have been suspicious about any changes RCI made to its exchange program.

The fact is that when weeks systems convert to point systems, the converted weeks, on average, have a much higher resale value than the unconverted weeks. That's because the market values them as being worth more. I'd love to see the shadow write an article to explain why that is. I'll bet his central argument would be that buyers of points are clueless about what they are getting and are therefore getting duped. After all, there is no way that points can be worth more than weeks, right? I just state the obvious. Converted weeks have more value because they are worth more to the market. It's as simple as that. Anything else is just spin.

It would have been much more compelling if he wrote an article that laid out the high level concept of why a move to points could be a drastic improvement to the weeks system. And then, show how RCI's execution just stunk. Now that would have been an insightful article.

[Carolinian Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close Carolinian]

The rampant mis-valuation of weeks in many points systems such as RCI Points due to inherent problems like overaveraging, rigidity, and insider deals with developers, make it a far inferior system.

As to higher resale values, there are some systems that try to trash their weeks based system in order to push owners to convert to points. This is not the market. It is a manipulation of the market.

Also, if you think points converted weeks are always higher, you might want to try to run that theory by someone like Peppertree-Equivest points owners or Club La Costa option points owners. You just might get a different view.

No points system that is restricted by a paper and ink publication system can possibly have the flexibility in week valuation to be honest or fair or even hold a candle to a weeks based system.

RCI Points is a terrible points program. Even so, it is a dramatic improvement over RCI weeks. That much the Shadow was clueless about in his article. What he was right about is the scheme that RCI used to get more money to convert the weeks. He is very cynical about that offering. But, he would have been suspicious about any changes RCI made to its exchange program.

The fact is that when weeks systems convert to point systems, the converted weeks, on average, have a much higher resale value than the unconverted weeks. That's because the market values them as being worth more. I'd love to see the shadow write an article to explain why that is. I'll bet his central argument would be that buyers of points are clueless about what they are getting and are therefore getting duped. After all, there is no way that points can be worth more than weeks, right? I just state the obvious. Converted weeks have more value because they are worth more to the market. It's as simple as that. Anything else is just spin.

It would have been much more compelling if he wrote an article that laid out the high level concept of why a move to points could be a drastic improvement to the weeks system. And then, show how RCI's execution just stunk. Now that would have been an insightful article.

[BocaBum99 Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close BocaBum99]

The Shadow = Charles H. Duell

This is a great quote by the Shadow:

First of all, I cannot find any new and improved 'stuff' with the RCI Points system (in terms of travel benefits) that they don't already offer RCI members (and guests) etc., and as hard as I've looked, except for the 'price tag' and more 'restrictions', it's the same soap.

It reminds me a lot of this quote by Charles H. Duell:

"Everything that can be invented has been invented."
Charles H. Duell, U.S. Commissioner of Patents, in 1899.

I'll help him out, here are three and a half. He claims to have a PhD in RCI Points. I'd say that in 2001, he barely made it to Kindergarten:

1) partial week stays. RCI weeks doesn't offer this benefit.

2) knowing your trading power before you buy. RCI weeks doesn't offer this benefit.

3) first come, first served reservations at the open reservation period. This is just like vacationers are used to seeing in hotels. It's what they prefer. RCI weeks doesn't offer this benefit.

4) monetizing your vacation week. i.e. selling points for about $.01/point. RCI Points doesn't allow owners to do this legally, but there is a black market for it. Other point systems do allow for it.

You can certainly knock RCI's feeble implementation of these benefits. But, to deny that these benefits exist or failing to acknowledge that there is a market for these benefits is being intellectually dishonest.

[BocaBum99 Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close BocaBum99]

No points system that is restricted by a paper and ink publication system can possibly have the flexibility in week valuation to be honest or fair or even hold a candle to a weeks based system.

Why do you always bring up this red herring issue? Who says that a point system is limited to an ink publication system? It's not. I have designed one that doesn't and I hope to register it with CARE sometime next year, if I have time. I already have a sponsor.

"Honest" and "weeks based system" are oxymorons. Just poll people coming out of deeding at a weeks based resort (that is if you can find one still selling weeks) and ask them how much trading power they have? Weeks based systems were created with hidden trading power so that resort developers could claim that their week has the highest trading power and that they should buy from them today. If you don't acknolwedge this point, you are being intellectually dishonest.

[Carolinian Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close Carolinian]

1. many of us find this not something we would use, but that is a matter of personal styles. It also negatively impacts full week use, which is what many of us bought timeshare for.

2. Frozen values are a minus, not a plus.

3. Oh! Just like airmiles! If you don't grab it when the window opens for popular items, it is GONE!

4. If you own a week, you have the full right to rent it to monetarize it, without resulting to a black market. How is this an improvement??!!!

This is a great quote by the Shadow:



It reminds me a lot of this quote by Charles H. Duell:



I'll help him out, here are three and a half. He claims to have a PhD in RCI Points. I'd say that in 2001, he barely made it to Kindergarten:

1) partial week stays. RCI weeks doesn't offer this benefit.

2) knowing your trading power before you buy. RCI weeks doesn't offer this benefit.

3) first come, first served reservations at the open reservation period. This is just like vacationers are used to seeing in hotels. It's what they prefer. RCI weeks doesn't offer this benefit.

4) monetizing your vacation week. i.e. selling points for about $.01/point. RCI Points doesn't allow owners to do this legally, but there is a black market for it. Other point systems do allow for it.

You can certainly knock RCI's feeble implementation of these benefits. But, to deny that these benefits exist or failing to acknowledge that there is a market for these benefits is being intellectually dishonest.

[Carolinian Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close Carolinian]

hidden and honest always beats published and rigged. As long as the results of a points valuation system are published but the method of establishing those values is not, then it does nothing but encourage insider deals between developers and the exchange company to rig the values, like all of the overpointing in overbuilt areas, which abslutely flies in the face of supply and demand principles.

I bring up the limitations of the paper and ink publication system simply becuase all of the points systems now out there use it! I would have thought that was obvious.

Why do you always bring up this red herring issue? Who says that a point system is limited to an ink publication system? It's not. I have designed one that doesn't and I hope to register it with CARE sometime next year, if I have time. I already have a sponsor.

"Honest" and "weeks based system" are oxymorons. Just poll people coming out of deeding at a weeks based resort (that is if you can find one still selling weeks) and ask them how much trading power they have? Weeks based systems were created with hidden trading power so that resort developers could claim that their week has the highest trading power and that they should buy from them today. If you don't acknolwedge this point, you are being intellectually dishonest.